Who is the Genius at MicroSoft?

Many of us use MicroSoft's Outlook e-mail program. Not a bad program. You can send and receive e-mail and use the calendar function to keep track of your life and days.

But there is one thing that really pets my peeve.

When you need to "dump" all your deleted e-mail you need to use Empty "Deleted Items" folder. Fine enough, it's pretty straight forward. But where do you find this command?

Logically, one should find it under Actions. It is an action after all.

But not Outlook. Nope, you have to click on Tools to get the Empty "Deleted Items" folder to appear.

So tell me, what tool do you use to empty deleted e-mails? A digital wheelbarrow?

Ultracrepidarian

Learned a new word today: ultracrepidarian

The word is an odd mix of Latin (ultra) and Greek (crepidas). It means to go beyound your step. Basically it means to opine about a subject that is beyond your expertise or that you have no business talking about.

Here is what "World Wide Words" has to say about how we got this interesting word:

Ultracrepidarian comes from a classical allusion. The Latin writer Pliny recorded that Apelles, the famous Greek painter who was a contemporary of Alexander the Great, would put his pictures where the public could see them and then stand out of sight so he could listen to their comments.

A shoemaker once faulted the painter for a sandal with one loop too few, which Apelles corrected. The shoemaker, emboldened by this acceptance of his views, then criticised the subject’s leg. To this Apelles is reported as replying (no doubt with expletives deleted) that the shoemaker should not judge beyond his sandals, in other words that critics should only comment on matters they know something about. In modern English, we might say “the cobbler should stick to his last”, a proverb that comes from the same incident. (A last is a shoemaker’s pattern, ultimately from a Germanic root meaning to follow a track, hence footstep.)

What Pliny actually wrote was ne supra crepidam judicaret, where crepidam is a sandal or the sole of a shoe, but the idea has been expressed in several ways in Latin tags, such as Ne sutor ultra crepidam sutor means “cobbler”, a word still known in Scotland in the spelling souter). The best-known version is the abbreviated tag ultra crepidam, “beyond the sole”, from which Hazlitt formed ultracrepidarian.

Crepidam derives from Greek krepis, a shoe; it has no link with words like decrepit or crepitation (which are from Latin crepare, to creak, rattle, or make a noise) or crepuscular (from the Latin word for twilight), though crepidarian is a very rare adjective meaning “pertaining to a shoemaker”.

http://www.worldwidewords.org/weirdwords/ww-ult1.htm

The Timing of Christmas Music

On November 1, 2007, my wife drove me to work. She likes to listen to an FM station that plays middle-of-the-road music. I enjoy it, too, but in recent years I have settled for the drive-time newsy stations and talk radio. But on this day—November 1, mind you—the station played nothing but Christmas music on the ride to work.

You read that right—Christmas music on November 1.

By the end of the day another Milwaukee station started playing Christmas music. The first station that started playing it stopped at noon and went back to its traditional playlist.

Why this rush to get Christmas music on the airwaves? Do merchants need to prod us this early for our shopping dollars?

When I worked part-time at a radio station Christmas music made its appearance after Thanksgiving. And then it wasn’t “all Christmas music all the time.” We played one Christmas tune each hour the first week, two each hour the second week, three each hour the third week, etc. Christmas Day was all Christmas music.

At the other end it seems all Christmas music is shut down on December 26. Then for a week you only hear the season-appropriate songs like “Frosty the Snow Man” and “Let it Snow.” Notice how soon those are erased from the airwaves after the New Year festivities are over?

Personally I don’t want the Christmas music before I have had a chance to digest my turkey. Okay, maybe while I’m eating my turkey (especially if the meal is supper). I would also like the music extended. Epiphany is January 6; Orthodox Christmas is January 7. Can’t we extend the Christmas music out to those dates? I personally still play it out to those dates.

Certainly extending the holiday music could go a long way to fight the winter blahs, ease the depression of impending taxes and tax preparation, and the like. Hey, maybe merchants wouldn’t have to rely on a local sports team playing late into the playoffs to keep sales numbers up (a friend of mine bought a store with his wife and their first year the Packers won the Super Bowl; he remarked that their numbers that year were dramatically better than the previous owner had the previous years and he believed people continued buying party supplies as long as Green Bay remained in the playoffs).

So let’s get a realistic policy on Christmas music.

Zogby on 19 September 2007:

Only 29 percent of Americans gave Bush a positive grade for his job performance,
below his worst Zogby poll mark of 30 percent in March. A paltry 11 percent
rated Congress positively, beating the previous low of 14 percent in
July.

Wow! As dismal as President Bush’s ratings are, he’s still almost three times as popular as Congress!

Food Stamp Challenge

On Wednesday September 19, 2007, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel had a fascinating piece entitled “A taste of poverty.” The aim of the article was to focus on “[Sherrie] Tussler, the executive director of the Hunger Task Force, and her 10-year-old daughter, Madeline, vowed to live on $21 of food each for an entire week - the average allocation for a food stamp recipient - as part of the Food Stamp Challenge, a national effort to highlight what Tussler says is insufficient funding for the federal Food Stamp Program.”

The timing was rather interesting for me personally. The evening before my wife, my son, and I helped sort and box donated food items at that same Hunger Task Force. We volunteered through my employer, Genesis 10.

Now I will say this is an admirable thing. Many of us don't realize what it's like to go without, or with less than we are accustomed to. We have cravings—but how many times do you want something but, after scanning a full fridge, go back to the TV and resist a craving because one doesn't find something one likes?

But there were also some questions I had about the article, perhaps some flaws. These I'd like to address.

The reporter does not tell us how Ms. Tussler comes to the $21/per person/per week allotment. The reporter does give us these statistics:

• $33 billion dollars--food stamp program
  
• 27 million people served in 2006

A quick calculation (on my computer calculator) brings this to $23.50 per person, per week (Sherri spent $21/pp,pw). That's American dollars, not Canadian (as of today the Canadian money might go farther). I'll give Ms. Tussler the benefit of the doubt that $21/week was easier to do mathematically than $23.50.

But I'm assuming that all 27 million received food stamp aid every week. Again, the reporter doesn't share with us something important like, oh, say, the average number of weeks a food stamp recipient receives aid. If the average length of assistance is 26 weeks, then you can double the per meal at $2, the same as the rate we pay for my son's hot lunch at the Lutheran elementary school where we send him ($40 for 20 meals).

There was another question I have. This was to replicate what a person could eat getting food stamps. As part of her “ordeal” Ms. Tussler made it a policy not to accept assistance from anyone. During the week she did this she was at a golf outing that raised funds for various charities (she stood at a hole to inform golfers about the Hunger Task Force.) Many offered her food, but she refused. I found this interesting because it would be like someone down on their luck, getting food stamps, but refuse food pantry help. You see, in America food stamps aren't the only way people get assistance. Many churches and groups (my church included) have food pantries. Besides Hunger Task Force, Second Harvest and many churches and individuals help to stock these food pantries. In fact food stamps aren't even the only government assistance available! There is assistance for housing, jobs, drug treatment, and a whole host of other programs all in an effort to help people. Unfortunately it's easy to focus on one small segment, blow it up like it's the sole source of assistance, and plead for more assistance.

As you read the article there were other items that jumped out at me. She eschews meat for peanut butter for the cost. I can buy a pound of ground turkey at Aldi for 69 cents. That's a few meals for two ladies right there (spaghetti, chili, Hamburger Helper...). 69 cents for the pound of turkey, $1 for a box of Helper, water should be free from the tap, maybe a quarter cup of milk. In our family the three of us get a good meal and some leftovers for the next day. A 29 cent can of vegetables from Aldi...you get the picture.

Then I noticed they reported what she spent for milk--$4 for one gallon! In the last two weeks I bought 2 gallons for $5 at Lena's and 4 half-gallons at Walgreens at $1.29 each ($2.58/gallon). Seems to me the exercise may be beneficial just in basic grocery economics. And one doesn't have to resort to bargain-basement grocers, either. Sendik's in Milwaukee, a traditional high-end grocer, is very competitive in its milk prices—with a name-brand milk! I recently paid $2.39 a gallon and not long ago it was regular priced at $1.99/gallon (Golden Guernsey, no less, which has caps to donate to my son's school for extra income for the school).

So while I admire the exercise, and appreciated reading about it, I would like to see some depth to the story. One angle could be explored is what the average recipient actually lives on on a weekly basis. Another is to show there is a panoply of assistance in America. Ms. Tussler chose to follow her regimen; many others have no choice, but they also don't turn down other offers of help. And finally, we can all be smarter in our shopping.

Ms. Tussler also wrote about declining help: “But I also know that after repeated requests for help, even family and friends will eventually set limits.” Something tells me the same holds true for taxpayers as well. We are told that this, that, and another program needs more funds, but the problems seem to linger. Maybe we need to put faces on the problem? Maybe the answer is fewer food stamps and more local charities like churches, food pantries, and the like?

Random Presidential Campaign Thoughts

Regarding John Edwards and his investment in the company evicting Katrina-affected New Orleanians:

If he cared about these victims, couldn't he have made better use of his role as presidential candidate AND key shareholder in the company to urge leniency for these victims? By "divesting" himself (remember, he cashes out for profit) he abdicates any voice he has in the matter. I would think sticking with the company and working from within would be more effective.

____


Pity poor Bill Clinton. He's trying to burnish his legacy for his 8 years in office. But his wife is running now and she needs to run as one who had influence in the Clinton White House. How can Bill polish both his legacy and his wife's credentials at the same time? A recent interview he stated he was advised by his wife on policy and proofreading documents. Now THAT's a high-rise tight-rope walk if I ever saw one!

You know, the Dems are messing up a golden opportunity.

In 2006 they campaigned against the "incompetence" of the Bush administration's administration of the Iraq War (while strangely silent about the Bush administration of the war in Afghanistan, whatever role we still have in the Balkans thanks to Bill Clinton, the Korea conflict currently in ceasefire, and protecting Europe against herself.

The Dems won control of both the House and the Senate. Suddenly things are in play. "Rummy" resigns and a new general is installed in Iraq. The president urges a surge. Seems that election lit a fire in the White House.

Now it seems the tide has turned and we're winning and may win this war. So, do you think the Dems would say, "Because of our leadership we spurred George Bush to make needed changes to win the war in Iraq." I mean, why NOT take advantage and take credit?

But, NO, they carp on how the war is still mishandled or how the administration is misleading the American people (despite known doves actually going to Iraq and then reporting--GASP--we could win this war!

Is partisan hatred so blind as to overlook golden opportunities?

Internet Email Scams

Now I don’t normally read e-mail scams. Sometimes I do, whether I was deceived by a misleading subject line, one entered my in-box while I was going through my e-mail, or even that the subject line was cleverly written. (I do know people who respond with things like counter-offers, marriage proposals, and the like.)

But the following e-mail scam message was somewhat interesting:

MR.Alan Willisc
14, Cameroon House, Wyndham Road,

Camber well, S.E. 5 OUJ. London UK.

I Am MR. Alan Willis a British Citizen And I Am 43yrs Of Age, I Am Married With Three Children, I Work With One Of The leading Bank Here In Lodon Uk.

I Am The Manager/Accounting Officer Of Mr. Brian Wright who Died On The Recent Bomb Blast, Which Occurred In London On the 7th Of July 2005.

Mr. Brian Long was National Of Your Country And An Expatriate With British House Of Common, He Was Our Client with Account Number UBS 101-720-4 Has Left The Sum Of (Five Million Five hundred Thousand Dollars) ($ 5,500.000.00) Which He Deposited With Us Before His Untimely Death. Before His Death He Was A Contractor With The British House Of Common

I Have Tried To Locate His Relative After His Death But Could Not; I There Fore Seek For Your Consent And Assistance To Stand As His Next Of kin So That His Money Be Transferred To Your Account Since I Could Not Locate Any Of His Relative. For Your Assistance You Will Receive 40% Of the Fund My Colleague And I Will Have 60%.

If You Are Interested In This Transaction I Will Like You To Contact Me As Soon As Possible So That I Will Give You More Information On How It will Be Done.

Treat With Utmost Confidentiality.

Yours sincerely,
MR.Alan Willis

Now there is this “common denominator” aspect to these e-mails—the bad grammar, spelling mistakes, and the like. Allegedly these missives are sent by “doctors and lawyers and such,” yet they cannot spell—or even consistently write their name?

This one adds that special touch: “I Am 43yrs Of Age, I Am Married With Three Children.” Is the author more believable because I know his age and family? I don’t think so.

But what really struck me was the alleged “victim.” In this case the unfortunate soul was killed “on [sic] the recent bomb blast, which occurred in London on the 7th of July 2005.” I believe this was the subway/bus blasts.

You see, there have been terrorist attacks even before 9/11. And these e-mail scams have been around even longer. But this was the first that I have seen anyway that directly tied the “deceased” to a specific terrorist attack. Most have been airplane crashes, some car accidents, but I haven’t read any that were about a victim of a terrorist attack. That doesn’t mean I didn’t receive one—I immediately delete many, many e-mails that appear to be the scam e-mails.
So, there you have it. Now the unfortunate national tragedies are fodder for these e-mail artists. I’m surprised that no victims of 9/11 were found to be without heirs and a wide ‘net is cast to find a survivor—or someone willing to be a “survivor.”

Whither Wal*Mart?

Recently the business pages noted that Wal*Mart's profits didn't increase, or increased at a slower rate, for the first time in 10 years.

Of course the press obediantly reported the Wal*Mart party line: The higher cost of gas led to a shifting of consumer spending. That was the main thrust of the news reports. I haven't seen any comparisions as to how other retailers are doing. The only other "excuse," outside of the high cost of gasoline, is the pull-out by Wal*Mart from the German and Korean markets.

Kohl's department stores, meanwhile, reported an increase in sales and profits. So while gas prices went up, a store known more for mid-level pricing outperforms a store known for "every day low prices." What gives?

Let's add some anecdotal incredients to the stew, shall we?

In mid-July I was in Appleton, WI, staying with my parents so my son could go to Vacation Bible School at grandma and grandpa's church. Mom was leafing through the flyers when an item caught her eye. She saw an ad for 70-count notebooks. Wal*Mart advertized them at $0.40 (40 cents) each. ShopKo (based in Green Bay, WI) had them 10 for $1 (or 10 cents each). Where do you think mom stocked up on notebooks?

Last week we bought Matthew's school supplies. We went to Wal*Mart because they are the lowest in cost, right? And since my wife looks at the flyers (some call them "circulars") I assumed she did her due diligence price comparisions. We bought the items at Wal*Mart.

Later in the day we were at a Target store. Walking past the school supplies I looked at the prices--most considerably lower than what we paid at Wal*Mart!

So is it possible that Wal*Mart, riding its cachet of low prices, is being undersold? It's quite possible that other retailers are starting to beat Wal*Mart at its own game!

I'm not here to dump on Wal*Mart. After the fire that left me without a home March 1st. I needed to replace lost items. Did you know you can buy new clothes on clearance at a lower price than buying used clothes at a resale shop or thrift store?

What does Lieberman's loss really mean?

By now much ink has been spilled and electrons manipulated on what exactly the Joe Lieberman loss in Connecticut means.

And what does it really mean?

To hear the anti-war peaceniks tell it, this one election is a referendum on the war in Iraq. If you'll recall, Senator Joseph Lieberman, who was on the Democratic ticket for VP against George W. Bush in 2000, had expressed support for the war in Iraq and that the task be finished. Not that he gave W. carte blanc. He had vociferously expressed opposition to policies and tactics in carrying out this war.

His opponent, Ned Lamont, ran a one-issue campaign (or he was only able to elucidate one issue). That issue was the war in Iraq, in which he aligned himself with Senator Russ Feingold (D-Wisconsin).

Thus what the editorial pages of the Wall Street Journal calls the "loony left" have sunk their teeth into this primary election outcome and feel vindicated in their anti-war, pro-terrorist stance. Ned Lamont's narrow victory, they believe, means the nation wants out of Iraq.

Now, the nation may well want out of Iraq. But the nation as a whole doesn't want to leave Iraq with an unfinished infrastructure and a continuing breeding ground for terrorists. Many people don't want war; many people also don't want threats to run unchecked, either.

But to believe that this one primary election is an omen or harbinger of a national trend and an indicator of how elections in November will go is a stretch. And the main-stream media has not answered several questions germaine to the debate:

1. Was the primary in Connecticut "open" or "closed?" If open, then Independants and Republicans could have "crossed over" if the Republican slate had no major races. In this case, Mr. Lamont's support is dubious. If "closed," then Mr. Lamont had a narrow margin of victory among Dems, who make up less than 1/3 of Connecticut voters. Mr. Lamont has to convince a huge array of people that he is worthy of their vote come November.

2. With Mr. Lieberman running as an Independant, what are the poll numbers now among likely voters? Will Mr. Lieberman's split from his party split the Democratic vote and propel a Republican to represent Connecticut in the Senate?

3. Will Mr. Lieberman prove that, while the radicals in his party seem to control the party, the majority of people aren't buying that message? Will this hurt the Democrats in the long run?

George McGovern ran as a "dove" in 1972, railing against the Vietnam War. While Americans may have believed Vietnam was a "quagmire" (thanks in large part to Walter Cronkite), they overwhelmingly re-elected Richard Nixon (yes, Nixon) to a second term.

Thus I will withhold any judgment on what the Lieberman-Lamont primary in Connecticut portends. There are too many unanswered questions and this particular primary race is one small slice of the American electoral populace as a whole.

War and the Christian

Christian Peacemaker Teams is a group that takes a pacifist approach to conflict and protests wars being fought, especially those with high visibility. I have only heard of their efforts in Iraq--do they also protest what the US and coalition forces are doing in Afghanistan and the Balkans? They also prefer to protest where it is more dangerous than the relatively safe confines of the United States and Europe.

Four members of the Iraqi protest team had been kidnapped. One, Tom Fox (and American), was killed. The remaining three were rescued by US and British soldiers.

The following statement comes the CPT web site:

[The ex-hostages] were in Iraq to learn of the struggles facing the people in that country. They went, motivated by a passion for justice and peace to live out a nonviolent alternative in a nation wracked by armed conflict. They knew that their only protection was in the power of the love of God and of their Iraqi and international co-workers. We believe that the illegal occupation of Iraq by Multinational Forces is the root cause of the insecurity which led to this kidnapping and so much pain and suffering in Iraq. The occupation must end.

Today, in the face of this joyful news, our faith compels us to love our enemies even when they have committed acts which caused great hardship to our friends and sorrow to their families. . . .

We pray that Christians throughout the world will, in the same spirit, call for justice and for respect for the human rights of the thousands of Iraqis who are being detained illegally by the U.S. and British forces occupying Iraq. During these past months, we have tasted of the pain that has been the daily bread of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. Why have our loved ones been taken? Where are they being held? Under what conditions? How are they? Will they be released? When?

Notice the statement? It uses the word "released" rather than "rescued." Were the captives released voluntarily by their captors? If so, why were soldiers needed to free them?

Then they accuse the soldiers who had just freed them of creating the hostile climate that exists now in Iraq. Tell me, how many people have been killed with nerve gas in the last three years? How many new mass graves were created in the last three years? Can you really say live was better in Iraq under Saddam Hussein? Would this group have been allowed to protest any war Saddam was in and do this protest inside Iraq? I doubt it.

Some (many?) Christians have this idyllic notion of war and peace and that if we all play nice, then everyone else will play nice. They look at Jesus as the "Prince of Peace" and seek to promote "Peace on earth." What they neglect to consider are Jesus' own words that he "did not come to bring peace but a sword" and his own words that the end times would be marked by "wars and rumors of war."

Sometimes wars need to be fought--and won. We fight to protect our nation. We fight to free oppressed peoples, especially those entrapped in evil, murderous dictatorships. Isn't this an extension to charity to our fellow man? Isn't that a concept Jesus would embrace?

For a more in-depth look at what Scripture says about war, read my Lutheranism article. Or read more on the Just War Doctrine.

Does that mean as Christians we accept war as inevitable? We can pray for peace. We can also work for peaceful solutions within our own community. But to acquiese to evil is to deny that there is also good. Blanket pacifism is just as dangerous as unchecked militarism.

I just have to share this with you. With the recent snowfall in the Milwaukee area (yes, we actually got some SNOW!), my son built a snowman at grandma and grandpa's house.

Look closely at the picture. See anything unique about the snowman?

If The Hair Club for Men is looking for any ad ideas, check out my son's snowman.

If you still don't see it, notice the snowman's head. My son decided it needed hair. And what better "hair" can a snowman have than a head of corn husk hair?

I don't think I would have thought of that when I built snowmen in my youth--and I had more practice because we always had snow growing up in Appleton (well, in Winter we had snow).

RIP, "Oakie" Brumm

On Monday, 23 January 2006, I read the paper and an obituary jumped out at me: Leonard "Oakie" Brumm. "Oakie" made a name for himself as a coach of youth hockey in the Milwaukee area. He also made a name for himself by writing and publishing a book entitled We Only Played Home Games. The book details Brumm's career, as brief as it was, as the recreation director at the state prison in Marquette, Michigan. The warden wanted something to keep the prisoners occupied so that they wouldn't cause trouble. The year before Brumm started his job the state prison in Jackson, Michigan, had had a riot. The warden wanted to prevent this from happening in Marquette.

Brumm accepted the job reluctantly, but pursued it with vigor once he took it. Along the way Brumm gives us a glimpse into prison life (and love), the tangles and frustrations of bureaucracy (golf clubs were deemed "dangerous weapons" even though baseball bats were already in the compound), and the delicate, egg-walking minuet of guards ("screws") and prisoners.

I had a chance to correspond with Oakie when his book came out and I reviewed it. I always tried to get him to make an appearance with his book at Salem's annual street picnic. He was always hopeful that the next year would find him free that wekend. I guess time ran out.

If you haven't read Brumm's book yet, I urge you to do so. At the very least you should find it in your local library.

Obituary of Leonard "Oakie" Brumm.

Review of We Only Played Home Games.

Ford, Toyota, and NASCAR

Yesterday's news was all about the downsizing at Ford. This is significant if only for the fact that American industry was rocketed forward by Henry Ford and his assembly line of Ford cars. When Henry built the River Rouge complex, raw materials came in one end of the complex and finished cars rolled off the line at the other end.

Of course Henry build this plant out of necessity. At that time it was difficult to get vendors who could supply enough parts to build the cars, to say nothing of quality control. Today many Fords are built by qualified vendors and the Ford plants merely assembled the finished parts into a finished vehicle.

Another announcement yesterday was Toyota's decision to field racing teams in NASCAR's Busch and Nextel Cup circuits. About 5 or 6 years ago Dodge did the same by resuming support of racing teams in those circuits. Seems the Dodge sponsorship of teams in the Craftsman series truck circuit showed promise so the Dodge Intrepid was pushed onto the ovals with the Pontiacs, Chevies, and Fords. Ironically, Toyota has been in the Craftsman circuit for a few years now, too, and are breaking into the Busch and Nextel series with cars.

As an aside, I wonder if the "good ol' boys" will root for Toyotas on the circuit. Toyota makes a vast majority of cars sold in the US in the US, mainly in plants located in the south. Stay tuned.

To close this loop, I haven't heard about Ford's involvement in NASCAR. Ford, like Chevrolet, Dodge, and Pontiac, supports teams in NASCAR. This is not a cheap endeavor. So, are people being laid off while the company still supports racing teams? And will the laid-off Ford employees cheer against the Ford cars in NASCAR? If so, will they cheer on the Toyotas racing the ovals?

About those "untraceable" cell phones...

ABC News broke a story that should be alarming on several fronts. It seems Wal*Mart has reported a sudden surge in sales of pre-paid cell phones. Using cash, someone can buy said phones and their identity remains a secret.

Well, I have some questions and maybe the ABC News reporter can answer them.

First, why are these cell phones suddenly so attractive for buyers (reportedly of Middle Eastern and Pakistani descent)? Could it be that someone leaked to the New York Times, which in turn decided to print the story, that the NSA (and George W. Bush) were eavesdropping on conversations? Perhaps this egregious breach in national security should be investigated. I sense the leak is serious enough to warrant charges of treason.

Next, those phones. Yes, you can pay cash for them. But does that make the user "anonymous?" Well, if you can buy the phone and use it immediately, it does. Now, reading the report on the internet (http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Investigation/story?id=1499905), I didn't see a brand name of phone, per se. A term "tracfone" was used, but was it used in a generic sense or as the name of a brand? Since I happen to own a TracFone, I know for a fact that this particular phone requires the purchaser to go to the TracFone web site and register the phone before the bank of minutes will be activated and the phone number for that phone given. Until this happens, the phones will not work. Unless the people buying them in bulk have a way to modify the phones to bypass the registration.

A local talk show host brought up the security issue this morning. I called to point out another issue--the fact the phones need to be registered to be activated. Could it be that identities are stolen in order to activate these phones? I found it somewhat interesting that Packer QB Brett Favre's identity had been pilfered and used for nefarious schemes and was reported in yesterday's news. Identity theft is all too common. I'd hate to have the FBI or other government agency knocking on my door because someone stole my identity and used it to register such a phone.

Of course the screener started arguing with me that these phones are paid for with cash and do not need to be activated. He rudely cut me off (I'll write the station manager and express my opinion). Anyway, I decided to do some research. Is it possible to buy a phone you can immediately use and not have to activate without giving some sort of identity?

I did a quick google of pre-paid (Google immediately asked, "Did you mean 'prepaid'?") programs. Besides TracFone there are about a half dozen prepaid phones and numerous prepaid phone cards. But every site I visited required an on-line activation of the phone or card.

So at lunch I took my research one step further. I stopped at the local Wal*Mart. There are, at this Wal*Mart, three different prepaid phones available. I read the details on all three. All three required an activation of some sort, usually through the internet.

So, which is scarier--that potential terrorists are using prepaid phones to try to avoid detection?

Or that in order to use these phones, and avoid detection, they may be stealing the identities of innocent Americans?

I would like to see a more in-depth report on this whole subject. As of now the ABC report on Google is 23 hours old. A more recent posting on the subject is 7 hours old--but the author wants to deny that we are even in a war.

Senator Feingold: LaFollette? Or McCarthy?

Senator Russell Feingold, Democratic senator from Wisconsin, has called for President Bush to withdraw all troops from Iraq by 31 December 2006.

Russell Feingold also knows Wisconsin’s storied history of senators. There was Robert “Fighting Bob” LaFollette, a Progressive. LaFollette is considered among the pantheon of great United States senators. Mr. Feingold would like people to think of him in this light.

Then there was Joseph “Tailgunner Joe” McCarthy. You know him as the 1950’s senator on a hunt for Communists in Washington, DC, in Hollywood, even in the army. McCarthy met his match when he went after the army.

It’s interesting that both of these senators have martial nicknames.

My grandmother went to school with Joe. She never had a kind word about him. She never mentioned, though, if she ever voted for him. She usually voted Republican and Joe ran as a Republican.

Back to Feingold. His announcement is met as a “bold, decisive move.” Well, all things considered and being relative, it’s a bold move for a senator. It also plays to the Democratic Party base. Remember Howard Dean? He had the same philosophy and the same initial burst in his campaign. Then, before you can say “ARRRRRGGGGHHHH” Dean lost the Iowa caucuses and tailspinned into political oblivion. Oh, sure, he runs the Democratic party now, but what type of position is that? And if the Dems lose more seats in 2006, he might be gone before he finishes his next “yell.”

Mr. Feingold, meanwhile, takes on an issue where he feels he is in a majority. The thing is, it’s not practical and it’s not consistent.

The impracticality of the plan is that the insurgents (really imported terrorists—and there are imported terrorists in Afghanistan as well, so don’t get started on the Iraq War making life more dangerous for Iraqis. The mass graves seem to tell me that the Iraqis weren’t much safer before the invasion) will wait out events until the US armed forces leave. Then they will step into the vacuum and take control. Meanwhile America’s credibility will be ruined. We already betrayed the Iraqi people by not taking out Saddam in 1991.

The inconsistency in this proposal is that Mr. Feingold is singling out this one area where American troops are stationed. Mr. Feingold, why not bring home the troops in Afghanistan? Or Korea? Or Europe? Why just Iraq? Hmmm? And please, no form letters from your staff. You insult me and my intelligence.

No, Mr. Feingold, you are more “Tailgunner Joe” than “Fighting Bob.” You might think you’re progressive, but you have not come up with any ideas that are in the best interests of our nation. Your bill, the McCain-Feingold bill, proved unable to keep “big money” out of politics; if anything, more money poured into politics with no restraint for what was said. Your insistence that the PATRIOT Act is wholly wrong is also unwarranted. Read what Lincoln did during the Civil War and how “unconstitutional” many of his actions were. The Union survived, our rights remain intact, and Mr. Lincoln is revered as a great president.

And now you want to betray the Iraqi people.

Haven’t the Iraqi people suffered long enough? At long last, sir, haven’t they suffered long enough?

How to lower gas prices

Here in Wisconsin gas is running about $3.25 a gallon. The Republican-led legislature has proposed suspending state gasoline taxes for the immediate future. The Democrativ governor's proposal is to lift a state law mandating a "minimum mark-up" on the price of gasoline (basically, a station owner must mark up his/her price a certain amount above what that person/company paid for the fuel). This "Minimum Mark-up" law is ostensibly to protect small operators and "Mom-and-Pop" operators from being driven out of business by large corporations.

So, we have two philosophies. One is creating a reprieve of a tax burden that benefits all (except the state coffers). The other one is willing to sacrifice small business owners to the whims of large corporations.

What do you think? Which plan is better suited for this emergency?

Or do you believe this is temporary and there is no emergency?

By the way, the state tax on gasoline? It is written into law that it goes up a certain percentage every April 1. Just like those automatic pay hikes for federal congress(wo)en and senators.

Some thoughts on what's in the news

The Wall Street Journal sends a daily e-mail which is called the "OpinionJournal Best of the Web." It is conservative in nature, often reflecting my own views. Today I want to comment further on some items they addressed.

Is Katrina Racist?
Al Sharpton showed up on Keith Olbermann's "Countdown" on MSNBC last night, and the pair sounded a theme that's becoming depressingly familiar in the effort to demagogue hurricane Katrina:

Olbermann: I actually heard a commentator this afternoon--it was that Limbaugh--suggest that the issue of class and race in those who were left behind in New Orleans was irrelevant, because, as he put it, those people were not forced to live there and they weren't bused into New Orleans. And I was thinking, A, this guy is even more clueless than I thought he was, which is saying something. But, B, there are people who actually believe that. How do you respond to them? How do you explain to them what the truth is? . . .

OK, Mr. Olbermann, why waste our time? You have already stated the "truth," you have come to a conclusion--perhaps a biased conclusion? You asked leading questions of the witness (an opposing trial attorney would be all over you if you used this line of questioning in a court of law). So much for a "unobjective" approach to journalism.

Sharpton: . . . The real question is not only those that didn't get out. The question is why has it taken the government so long to get in. I feel that, if it was in another area, with another economic strata and racial makeup, that President Bush would have run out of Crawford a lotquicker and FEMA would have found its way in a lot sooner.

Then there's the "Rev." (sic) Al Sharpton who never met an incident he couldn't put a racist label on--even if he supported an alleged rape victim crying "race," then cried "race" when her story was revealed to be false. So "Rev." (sic), why didn't YOU gather supplies and lead a caravan to help the city? What moral authority do YOU have to sit in a broadcast booth and denounce the lack of action on the part of others?

The Case for Rebuilding
Yesterday we noted the case for pessimism about whether New Orleans can come back from
the Katrina catastrophe. George Friedman of the Stratfor intelligence firm argues that it must:

The Ports of South Louisiana and New Orleans, which run north and south of the city, are as important today as at any point during the history of the republic. . . .A simple way to think about the New Orleans port complex is that it is where the bulk commodities of agriculture go out to the world and the bulk commodities of industrialism come in. The commodity chain of the global food industry starts here, as does that of American industrialism. If these facilities are gone, more than the price of goods shifts: The very physical structure of the global economy would have to be reshaped. . . .New Orleans is not optional for the United States' commercial infrastructure. It is a terrible place for a city to be located, but exactly the place where a city must exist. With that as a given, a city will return there because the alternatives are too devastating. The harvest is coming, and that means that the port will have to be opened soon. As in Iraq, premiums will be paid to people prepared to endure the hardships of working in New Orleans. But in the end, the city will return because it has to.

You know, in 1803 our government sought to buy New Orleans because of its vital role in world trade and American commerce. We came away buying the whole of the Louisianna Purchase. I'd say New Orleans has long been a center of American and global commerce. It isn't by chance that the Civil War's end was hastened once New Orleans fell to the Union forces.

Durbin's Curious Civil Rights Views
Sen. Dick Durbin, best known for likening American soldiers to Nazis, weighs in today with a Chicago Tribune op-ed in advance of the John Roberts hearings. Mostly it's liberal boilerplate, but one assertion got our attention: "Nowhere did the Constitution expressly give Congress the authority to pass the Civil Rights Act [of 1964]."

You know, had a CONSERVATIVE or a REPUBLICAN said this, he/she would have been denounced until that person would have A) apologized, B) resigned in disgrace, and probably even C) been shaken down by "Rev." (sic) Jesse Jackson to "help" (sic) minority organizations (i.e., his own minority pockets).

Have a happy Labor Day weekend!

Chinese women

This is just a quick observation.

The Peninsula Daily News, August 10, 2005, relays a report from

The Independent that has the following item:

China faces an acute lack of women.

So serious is the dearth of females that it is estimated that by 2020, 40 million men will be forced to remain bachelors.

Last month it was announced that female astronauts are to be recruited for China's space program, in an effort to create positive female role models and reverse the traditional Chinese preference for
boys over girls.

So, there's a shortage of women, but they'll address this by sending the few they have into space? Think about it....

A Hall of Fame game

Tonight the NFL Hall of Fame preseason game will be played. This game will feature the Miami Dolphins and the Chicago Bears. One would have thought perhaps the Dolphins and San Francisco 49ers would be playing as two inductees in yesterday's ceremony were Dan Marino (Dolphins) and Steve Young (49ers).

But perhaps it's best that the weekend Dan Marino is inducted the game should be played by the two teams that played a game that if not defined Marino's career cemented it. Let's go back, to 1985, the Bears are 12-0 and the Dolphins, fresh off a Super Bowl loss to the 49ers, are still fighting for a playoff spot (they would win the division, but lose the conference championship game to New England).

The Bears had eaten quarterbacks all year. The Bears brought a heavy blitz to the house, a blitz that prevented the opposing quarterback from getting time to get set and find an open receiver.

That scheme had worked for 12 games as the Bears swaggered in 12-0. There was talk that the Perfect Season of the 1972 Dolphins would be matched (ironically, that talk surrounded the Dolphins the previous season as they started out 12-0).

But the game on Monday night turned out to be a route. But it was the underdog Dolphins who were doing the routing. By halftime it was evident that Miami was in control and Chicago had no answer to Marino.

You see, the blitz didn't bother Marino. His line blocked just well enough, his release was quick enough, and the blitzing Bears left way too many receivers open for Marino to find, which he frequently did. Had the Bears seen film of the previous Super Bowl, they might have dropped men in coverage rather than blitz. But they died that night on the blitz, a scheme Marino exploited like no other quarterback before and still no other QB has exploited it.

In the second quarter my Bears fan friends decided they didn't want to face me--one even locked himself in his room (I think we heard him sobbing). They were so sure the Bears would not only win that game but go undefeated.

Had it not been for a rare cool day in Miami and a rare sloppy performance by the Dolphins, the 'Phins and Bears may have met for a rematch in the Super Bowl. Would Buddy Ryan have stuck with his blitzing scheme and given Marino a Super Bowl title? Or would the Bears have learned something from that night? I think the Dolphins would have won the rematch--the blitzing covered up the weak secondary of the Bears that year.